saberXray:I direct a small opera company, and while it's always sad to see a company go, I've never seen a well managed company/orchestra/theatre who understood the business of the arts fold. Ever. Usually the reasons these organizations fail is because people's heads are way too far up their own asses.

For example...New York Opera needs 10 Farking Million to stage one production of Madama Butterfly?!?! Do you know what a waste that is? Do you know how many farking lives can be touched with the arts in a significant way for that much money? Instead they want to waste it on a vanity project.

If you're referring to the Met Opera, it's productions may be the most expensive in the world, but it's live broadcasts reach hundreds of thousands of people all over the world. No other arts organization has that kind of global reach. And it's Live in HD broadcast has brought grand opera to just about every city in the western world.

Not all Sauder stuff is bad, we have a Sauder coffee table we bought for our first apartment after we got married (I was in the Navy, not rolling in dough for sure) that is still going strong 20+ years later.

thornhill:I think the fact that so many classical music organizations have a hard time raising money reflects how middle class most of their patrons are

I think you're right. I see a lot of college students at classical concerts, a lot of retired folks, but largely middle class. While several of the local philanthropists pumps millions of dollars into the arts, I don't normally see them in attendance.

Mr. Right:Kudos on managing a successful opera company. But I do have to ask, in partial defense of New York Opera (are you referring to the bankrupt NY City opera?) how many different unions you are forced to employ in order to stage your operas? The electricians, grips, sound engineers, construction crew, costumers, etc. typically all make a lot more than the average chorus musician. Orchestral musicians cost a lot of money just for rehearsals before the first ticket is sold.

The New York City Opera was colossally - one might say operatically - mismanaged. The labor unions had nothing to do with it going under. Every major opera company has to deal with unions. Some thrive (the Met, Chicago, Houston), some don't. The NYCO suffered from a lack of focus, constantly shifting management, fiscal irresponsibility, and an almost perverse delight in scheduling (and commissioning) operas that no one wanted to see. It essentially stopped producing operas for an entire season (2008-09), which, considering that it wasn't the only opera company in town, contributed greatly to its death spiral. Donors and patrons simply went to the Met and never returned to the NYCO. So, on the list of reasons why the NYCO failed, I wouldn't even mention unions, except maybe in a footnote.

I love the opera; I just treated myself to a season subscription to the Vancouver Opera. Don't let anyone make you feel intimidated by it. I've gone in an evening gown, and I've gone in jeans, and nobody's given me grief either way. Contrary to what someone said above, there aren't any weird unwritten rules - just applaud when everyone else does (at the end of each act and briefly after each big solo), and enjoy getting tipsy at intermission, which is perfectly acceptable.

The tickets aren't cheap - opera is the most expensive performance art to produce - but they are comparable to big sports events or rock concerts, and you can often get very good last minute deals.

thornhill:saberXray: I direct a small opera company, and while it's always sad to see a company go, I've never seen a well managed company/orchestra/theatre who understood the business of the arts fold. Ever. Usually the reasons these organizations fail is because people's heads are way too far up their own asses.

For example...New York Opera needs 10 Farking Million to stage one production of Madama Butterfly?!?! Do you know what a waste that is? Do you know how many farking lives can be touched with the arts in a significant way for that much money? Instead they want to waste it on a vanity project.

If you're referring to the Met Opera, it's productions may be the most expensive in the world, but it's live broadcasts reach hundreds of thousands of people all over the world. No other arts organization has that kind of global reach. And it's Live in HD broadcast has brought grand opera to just about every city in the western world.

I'm referring to the bankrupt NYC Opera company. That was in reference to a previous comment made in this thread. Don't get me started about Met Opera HD Broadcasts...they charge people to watch DVDs (most of them aren't live), and I barely see any of those folks at all the other local live arts performances. Opera is meant to be a LIVE art form. When you watch it on a screen, you're losing something intangible, something that makes it truly a magical, unique experience. Ever been to the theatre? Why is it such a unique experience instead of watching TV? Because there is something intangible about it...it has a certain quality that no one can quite put their fingers on - but it is amazing.

My chief problem with the Met broadcast is this: Instead of focusing on live and local arts, the Met has chosen to siphon money out of communities under the guise of outreach. Everyone involved pats themselves on the back, saying what a good job they're doing for the arts, but they're doing absolutely nothing to foster the art form. They're taking from the communities and give practically nothing back.

saberXray:thornhill: saberXray: I direct a small opera company, and while it's always sad to see a company go, I've never seen a well managed company/orchestra/theatre who understood the business of the arts fold. Ever. Usually the reasons these organizations fail is because people's heads are way too far up their own asses.

For example...New York Opera needs 10 Farking Million to stage one production of Madama Butterfly?!?! Do you know what a waste that is? Do you know how many farking lives can be touched with the arts in a significant way for that much money? Instead they want to waste it on a vanity project.

If you're referring to the Met Opera, it's productions may be the most expensive in the world, but it's live broadcasts reach hundreds of thousands of people all over the world. No other arts organization has that kind of global reach. And it's Live in HD broadcast has brought grand opera to just about every city in the western world.

I'm referring to the bankrupt NYC Opera company. That was in reference to a previous comment made in this thread. Don't get me started about Met Opera HD Broadcasts...they charge people to watch DVDs (most of them aren't live), and I barely see any of those folks at all the other local live arts performances. Opera is meant to be a LIVE art form. When you watch it on a screen, you're losing something intangible, something that makes it truly a magical, unique experience. Ever been to the theatre? Why is it such a unique experience instead of watching TV? Because there is something intangible about it...it has a certain quality that no one can quite put their fingers on - but it is amazing.

My chief problem with the Met broadcast is this: Instead of focusing on live and local arts, the Met has chosen to siphon money out of communities under the guise of outreach. Everyone involved pats themselves on the back, saying what a good job they're doing for the arts, but they're doing absolutely nothing to foster the art form. They're taking ...

A few things:

1. What happened to City Opera was very specific to City Opera. A combination of mismanagement, not adjusting budgets to reflect declining revenue, and then going dark for two season.

2. The Met's matinee broadcasts are live. They do replays during the week.

3. For many people there are no local options, or, the options are 4 concerts for the whole year. Scoffing at people who go the movie theaters to watch an opera production is the very definition of elitism.

GOP? WUT? Must have changed allot since I was stationed there in the 90's. Solidly Liberal then.

No it was not. Maybe your specific stratum of society was liberal and we're glad to have you, but the neocons have run this f*cking joint for a long long time now. My favorite phrase to characterize what I consider to be a disgusting closed system of corrupt backroom dealmaking supporting a crew of conservative thieves is that SD is the biggest small town I've ever lived in.

saberXray:it has a certain quality that no one can quite put their fingers on - but it is amazing.

And it costs a lot of money to produce a quality opera.

The San Diego Opera had to go from 5 productions a year to 4 productions a year several season back. I'm sorry, but I'm not paying those sorts of ticket prices (nor am I going to sit still) to listen to the Bumfark Orchestra play backup to somebody's cousin Debby in a "modernized" rendition of Salome. Even if Debby is stacked and gives us a full frontal at the end of the dance of the veils.

Old_Chief_Scott:saberXray: it has a certain quality that no one can quite put their fingers on - but it is amazing.

And it costs a lot of money to produce a quality opera.

The San Diego Opera had to go from 5 productions a year to 4 productions a year several season back. I'm sorry, but I'm not paying those sorts of ticket prices (nor am I going to sit still) to listen to the Bumfark Orchestra play backup to somebody's cousin Debby in a "modernized" rendition of Salome. Even if Debby is stacked and gives us a full frontal at the end of the dance of the veils.

No, it doesn't take a lot of money. It takes a lot of effort. I've seen productions that cost millions to put on and sucked. I've seen productions that took place in a bar that were by far some of the best productions I have ever seen. It's all about imagination, ingenuity, and hard work.

And as far as someone's cousin Debby, I have no idea where you've seen that production, but yeah, I'd probably have to have a few drinks in me during intermission to sit through that one. However, the problem there would be that the local arts organization isn't fulfilling their mandate to the people - to be a relevant cultural resource. I know you were giving an extreme example, but that doesn't make me wrong, or you wrong. That makes that orchestra wrong :P

It's not that I want to hate opera. I most certainly don't. If I had a choice, I'd choose to enjoy it. And yes, I HAVE heard people who are good at opera singing it. I have heard good orchestras playing the music. And I still find that in pretty much every opera I've ever heard there are parts that are as grating on my ears as some people seem to find nails on a chalkboard.

I don't want to see opera die out, I'm happy that my city's opera company is apparently going strong. But I will likely never willingly attend a performance.

Unless you want to talk about Opera the web browser. I hate it too, and I don't even feel slightly bad about it, it's a steaming piece of shiat, always has been, should never have been released, and needs to die.

I was a stage combat guy-supernumary for the Seattle opera. It was astounding, incredibly expensive to produce, and worth every penny. Working with singers like Eglise Gutierrez and Lawrence Browntree simply blew me away...and they had a student discount!

saberXray:thornhill: saberXray: I direct a small opera company, and while it's always sad to see a company go, I've never seen a well managed company/orchestra/theatre who understood the business of the arts fold. Ever. Usually the reasons these organizations fail is because people's heads are way too far up their own asses.

For example...New York Opera needs 10 Farking Million to stage one production of Madama Butterfly?!?! Do you know what a waste that is? Do you know how many farking lives can be touched with the arts in a significant way for that much money? Instead they want to waste it on a vanity project.

If you're referring to the Met Opera, it's productions may be the most expensive in the world, but it's live broadcasts reach hundreds of thousands of people all over the world. No other arts organization has that kind of global reach. And it's Live in HD broadcast has brought grand opera to just about every city in the western world.

I'm referring to the bankrupt NYC Opera company. That was in reference to a previous comment made in this thread. Don't get me started about Met Opera HD Broadcasts...they charge people to watch DVDs (most of them aren't live), and I barely see any of those folks at all the other local live arts performances. Opera is meant to be a LIVE art form. When you watch it on a screen, you're losing something intangible, something that makes it truly a magical, unique experience. Ever been to the theatre? Why is it such a unique experience instead of watching TV? Because there is something intangible about it...it has a certain quality that no one can quite put their fingers on - but it is amazing.

My chief problem with the Met broadcast is this: Instead of focusing on live and local arts, the Met has chosen to siphon money out of communities under the guise of outreach. Everyone involved pats themselves on the back, saying what a good job they're doing for the arts, but they're doing absolutely nothing to foster the art form. They're taking ...

Also;

- The Met Broadcasts aren't equal across all theatres. Some of them can be live, but where I am, and the theatres that buy them, only show one or two live ones, and the rest as rebroadcasts.

- Mismanagement isn't uniquely an NYC Opera thing. I've seen three (THREE!) regional opera companies fold in the past 2 years due to mismanagement. I've worked in the non-profit arts world long enough to know it's not a unique thing. If San Diego folded, it's tragic, but there must have been a problem. If people just 'stop going to the opera', then YOU aren't doing your job. You aren't making it relevant. You aren't recruiting your audience. You aren't doing your job as a cultural resource in your community. Itsucks to lose yet another opera company, but this is a business. If the market changes, you adapt or die. That simple.

- I fail to see where I was 'scoffing at the people'. I was scoffing at the Met. I think it's elitist to assume that the only access you have to the arts, even if you're in a remote community (and I've visited quite a few as a musician), is when the Met broadcasts to the poor backwaters of society. Now THAT'S elitist.

However, I do think we agree on quite a few points. Clearly, we are both passionate about the arts, and if you're ever in my neck of the woods, let's grab a beer.

One of my best friends works part time (for among other things) an opera company and at a time many other local arts organizations are in trouble they are able to put on shows and even travel. From what I see it is all about the management, putting on shows that people will pay to see instead of what you think they should see and keeping the costs in line with the revenue and not always counting on some donor to bail you out.